Kant's Humorous Writings

An Illustrated Guide

Robert R. Clewis

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781350112803
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophers

While Kant is commonly regarded as one of the most austere philosophers of all time, this book provides quite a different perspective of the founder of transcendental philosophy. Kant is often thought of as being boring, methodical, and humorless. Yet the thirty jokes and anecdotes collected and illustrated here for the first time reveal a man and a thinker who was deeply interested in how humor and laughter shape how we think, feel, and communicate with fellow human beings. In addition to a foreword on Kant's theory of humor by Noël Carroll as well as Clewis's informative chapters, Kant's Humorous Writings contains new translations of Kant's jokes, quips, and anecdotes. Each of the thirty excerpts is illustrated and supplemented by historical commentaries which explain their significance.

PART ONE

Kant’s Theory of Humor

Chapter 1

The Secret Soul of Kant’s Joke

Any useful guide to Kant’s humorous writings should, I would imagine, characterize Kant’s theory of humor. In the present case, in order to understand the jokes and anecdotes gathered in Parts Two and Three of this book, it seems prudent to address the topic at the outset. So, with a nod to Nietzsche let us ask: What is the secret soul of Kant’s joke?¹

As I noted in the Preface, Kant is not generally known for his wit or sense of humor. He is renowned for his philosophical writings, in particular the three Critiques: Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87), the Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and the Critique of the Power of Judgment (1790). These works have been profoundly influential in aesthetic theory, the philosophy of nature, ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics. About half a century after these works appeared, the German poet Heinrich Heine claimed that Kant initiated an intellectual revolution in Germany that was analogous to the political Revolution in France.² At the same time, Heine asserted that Kant “lived a mechanically ordered, almost abstract bachelor existence.”³ Due to such characterizations, Kant is usually considered to be boring, overly punctual, and methodical—allegedly fitting for a philosopher whose ethical theory was based on maxims and principles. These views persist even today. One author recently claimed that Kant “was not a particularly funny guy.”⁴

But the image of Kant as dour and humorless is misleading. When Kant was a younger man, decades before he became famous for his three Critiques, he was known in social circles as the gallant or elegant Magister (maestro).⁵ Kant’s presence is reported to have animated balls and dinner parties, and he would tell stories and jokes to his classes at the University of Königsberg.

Kant admired humorists from Rabelais and Cervantes to Butler, Swift, and Voltaire.⁶ He esteemed Laurence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy, Edward Young’s The Universal Passion and Night-Thoughts, Henry Fielding’s Tom Jones, and Pope’s Peri Bathous, or the Art of Sinking in Poetry. He also appreciated Hogarth’s satirical engravings.⁷

Kant’s views on humor were also probably informed by his personal friends and acquaintances. Kant spent time with intellectuals in Königsberg such as Johann Georg Hamann (1730–88), a literary critic and Christian theologian who wrote in a witty, idiosyncratic style, and Theodore Hippel (1741–96), who authored plays such as The Man of the Clock. (This play was reportedly based on Kant’s close friend Joseph Green, who pedantically lived by the clock,⁸ a stereotype later associated with Kant, rather unfortunately.) It is likely that Hamann, Hippel, and Kant and other friends had lively conversations about jest and comedy and that these exchanges shaped the formation of Kant’s ideas about humor.

As he developed this account, Kant engaged with the dominant theories of humor of his day. In order to understand Kant’s theory, we need to discuss three main theories of humor: superiority theory, incongruity theory, and relief theory.

In this introductory chapter, I explain these theories of humor, providing some historical context (section 1). I then characterize Kant’s account as a combination of these three theories, with elements of Kant’s own contribution, mental play theory (section 2). I describe his views of the “agreeable arts” and the three “arts” of laughter (wit, naiveté, caprice) (section 3). Finally, I bring together and give shape to Kant’s somewhat scattered reflections on theatrical comedy (section 4).

1. Superiority, Incongruity, and Release Theories

Before proceeding, however, we need to clarify some terms. These are not intended to be once-and-for-all definitions, but merely guides for the subsequent discussion.⁹

Humor is what comic amusement is directed at, in other words, the object of our attention when we find something comically amusing or feel comic merriment.¹⁰ Of course, not every instance of humor is thought to be funny or results in laughter.¹¹ Even if not all instances of humor elicit comic amusement, comic amusement is paradigmatically a response to an instance of humor. It admits of degrees, ranging from mild amusement to the paroxysms of mirth.¹² Humor can be found, as when one stumbles on a funny mistake or ambiguity in a dinner menu or newspaper headline. Or, it can be invented and crafted, as jokes are.

Wit can be thought of as a person’s capacity to create or generate humor, that is, to elicit comic amusement. (Kant sometimes uses the term in a broader sense than this, however, as I will explain in this chapter.)

Laughter is a bodily response involving the expulsion of air from the lungs, accompanying sounds, characteristic facial distortions, and even the shaking of the whole body.¹³ Laughter can be caused by a number of things besides comic amusement, including tickling, intoxication, a sense of inclusion or exclusion, stress, embarrassment, and nervousness. There are cultural differences in how and why we laugh, and there are many different kinds of laughter.

Jokes can be told for all sorts of reasons—to break the ice, to relate bad news, to impress your peers, and so on. Yet a joke’s ability to serve in these functions or capacities is, in my view, parasitic upon the joke’s realizing its quintessential and primary aim, which is to elicit comic amusement.

There are many kinds of jokes. Some are formula jokes (“An elephant walks into a bar …”) and some are fiction or story jokes, that is, have a narrative structure.¹⁴ Most narrative jokes take longer to tell than quips, wisecracks, witticisms, witty sayings, and bon mots.¹⁵ The line between jokes and quips (etc.) is fuzzy; indeed, such lack of clear demarcation can be seen in the excerpts collected in this book. Some of Kant’s “jokes” are so short that they are perhaps best seen as only quips or bon mots. Quips, wisecracks, witticisms, witty sayings, and bon mots are closely related, often overlapping, forms of expression that are usually but not always intended to elicit comic amusement. In addition to jokes, quips, wisecracks (etc.), there are many other kinds of humor, most of which are not addressed in this guide to Kant on humor for the simple reason that Kant did not discuss them: situational humor, prop comedy, parody, impersonation, and so on.¹⁶

Finally, it should be noted that not all forms of amusement are comic. Soap operas and crossword puzzles amuse those who watch or complete them, but they are not comic.¹⁷

Humor has several functions: to create social bonds, to ostracize, to let off steam, to deal with life’s trials, just to name a few. We joke about the problems and absurdities of life. If we face a difficult situation, we might use humor to cope or rebel.¹⁸ Humans can make jest even in the darkest of times. In the opening scene of the autobiographical novel, The Sunflower (1969), God’s absence becomes the object of a joke (amusing or not)....